Docstoc

The Beautiful Story of Logo

Document Sample
The Beautiful Story of Logo Powered By Docstoc
					The Beautiful Story of Logo
     Papert (1980) Mindstorms:
 Children, computers, and powerful
               ideas
How to approach the topic
Programming
Learning by design
ConstrucTIVEism
ConstrucTIONism
Robotics
“learning without curriculum”
Effects WITH versus effect OF (Soloman,
Perkin & Gloverson)
        Papert’s Claims

Logo provides nurturing environment for
cognitive development.
Logo increases student delight in
learning.
Logo allows students to create
microworlds for studying math and
science concepts.
          What is Logo?

Lisp-like language.
Capable of recursion and structured
programming (modular or procedural).
» Contrast with object-oriented
Turtle graphics embedded.
Usable by pre-school to college.
The story unfolds: Teachers
 adopt Logo, believing...

Logo will promote math problem
solving.
Logo makes students more interested.
Logo will improve math & science test
scores.
          The problem

Discovery WITH Logo vs effects OF
learning the Logo language.
Teaching WITH Logo vs. teaching
ABOUT Logo.
Over-scaffolding learning vs. allowing
discovery and “subversive learning.”
          The answer?

Controlled research studies of Logo
Teach a student Logo…. See if they are
better problem solvers or score higher
on math tests.
  The problem (revisited)

When done near MIT.. It works.
When done elsewhere.. Not so much.
    The answer (part #2)

Papert rejects research as
“technocentric” thinking.
Paper argues the DVs should be about
the “culture of learning” not about
individual achievement.
    The problem (anew)

Educators attack Papert and reject Logo
as just programming.
Important philosophical and measurement
concerns go unaddressed.
        The answer (Part #3)
Lego to the rescue.
Robot programming with Logo-like language.
40-minute, bite-sized units created for
classroom use.
Lego simplifies and reduces the Logo
Language. (accommodating education)
Teacher easily integrate the lessons into their
curriculum.
     The problem (again)

Logo pulls out saying the materials do
not promote the kind of learning Logo
was designed for.
Issues of philosophy and measurement
remain unresolved.
Moral?

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:2
posted:3/21/2013
language:English
pages:13